The New Bailout

Originally Posted by classicman

Way to see only what you want - you're transparency is showing Dux.

In fact, what I saw about a week or so ago, was the full testimony of Devaney, the head of the ARRA accountability board....and not just the few sentences w/o context in the partisan editorial that you evidently find so meaningful.

But it is what you and Merc do best.....in your "gotcha" game. You two really are interchangeable.

You cut and past a partisan editorial.

You rarely, if ever offer your own opinion with your initial post/link - perhaps just a one-line snide comment.

And you never provide any context at all.

Its a bullshit way to encourage discussion and it just gets tiresome after awhile.

Carry on without me.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Carry on without me.

Gladly.

Edit: Actually sorry to hear you have that attitude about people who disagree with you. I have learned some stuff from your contribution, not much, but it has been measurable. You might just want to take a break and try again later.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Gladly.

Edit: Actually sorry to hear you have that attitude about people who disagree with you. I have learned some stuff from your contribution, not much, but it has been measurable. You might just want to take a break and try again later.

It is not at all about people who disagree with me.

I learn from undertoad and lookout....I even learn from UG.....because they post and discuss their own opinions.

It is a matter of style.

As I said, it has just gotten tiresome for me to respond to one after another after another of the partisan editorials that cherry pick the facts (in this latest case, two sentences out of two hours of testimony) that you and classic throw out repeatedly with a "gotcha" attitude as a basis for discussion....w/o even offering your own opinions.

I can read partisan editorials (on both sides) w/o coming here.

I'm done.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

It is not at all about people who disagree with me.

I learn from undertoad and lookout....I even learn from UG.....because they post and discuss their own opinions.

It is a matter of style.

As I said, it has just gotten tiresome for me to respond to one after another after another of the partisan editorials that cherry pick the facts (in this latest case, two sentences out of two hours of testimony) that you and classic throw out repeatedly with a "gotcha" attitude as a basis for discussion....w/o even offering your own opinions.

I can read partisan editorials (on both sides) w/o coming here.

I'm done.

So be it. Your choice.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Redux

As I said, it has just gotten tiresome for me to respond to one after another after another of the partisan editorials that cherry pick the facts (in this latest case, two sentences out of two hours of testimony) that you and classic throw out repeatedly with a "gotcha" attitude as a basis for discussion....w/o even offering your own opinions.

Which is why wacko extremism works. Anybody can cherry pick a sound byte. Rush Limbaugh does it routinely AND teaches extremists how to do it. Reality requires much more work; takes longer to explain.

But then Hitler was an early master. Disparage the bourgeois and intelligencia. Once done, it becomes easy to prove Saddam has WMDs.

They continued doing it to you because that is what wacko extremist do. If even a moderate conservative, then he must be a flaming liberal. That soundbyte cheapshot proved itself.

Easy to post lies and half truths especially when others do not hold them to the required 1500 words of supporting facts, numbers, and reality.

classicman is particular good at subverting discussions with his soundbyte attacks masking as a question. Some call it 'stir the pot'. It really was, for example, outright attacks on Jill because she posted what the overwhelming majority of professionals have always said - with supporting facts and example. She posted what a political agenda fears.

Examples of cheapshots demonstrated by classicman's nefarious soundbyte attacks on Jill in Torture memos.

Notice: soundbyte attacks prove that professionals advocate torture. That is the wacko extremist propaganda; despite reality. Professional interrogators routinely show torture does not work. But to explain truth requires 1500 words in response to each cheapshot attack. What classicman does is also how the Nazis grabbed power in 1930s Germany. And so they have successfully driven you silent? Same extremist agenda was used even in 1930s Germany.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

classicman is particular good at subverting discussions with his soundbyte attacks masking as a question.

More attacks against a poster - something tw claims incorrectly that he never does and routinely ridicules others about - further examples of what a hypocrite tw is.

Originally Posted by tw

It really was, for example, outright attacks on Jill
Examples of cheapshots demonstrated by classicman's nefarious soundbyte attacks on Jill in Torture memos.

ORLY? Your example above is a question repeatedly asked of Redux, not Jill. Care to try again tw or would you prefer to admit that you are wrong again?